Re: [xml-dev] XLink/XHTML consensus?

Uche Ogbuji <> wrote:
| > "Wayne Steele" <> wrote:

|>| 3. It requires a non-xml syntax to be created (to represent link behavour 
|>| and semantics, with is then stuffed into a Notation's Public ID)
|> 
|> Demonizing DTDs is one thing, but to call declaration syntax "non-xml" is
|> nothing more than prejudice.  If it were true, the XML *spec* wouldn't
|> have bothered with specifying syntax for declarations.  I mean, really.
| 
| From my reading, what he was calling non-XML was not DTD syntax but the 
| "xlink: show=new actuate=onLoad" that gets stuffed into the notation pub 
| ID, 

Your reading is better than mine, and correct.  I autoassociated "It uses
DTDs" with "non-xml syntax" in my reading.  My apologies to Wayne.

However!

There is nothing syntactically non-xml about that string as a Public ID. 
It has only minimum data characters.  (I think I'm one of the few people
in the world - maybe the only one - who doesn't automatically expect to
see FPI syntax in XML public ids.  I could claim this as an excuse for my
misreading, but I won't - I should have read more closely anyway.)